On Tuesday, February 4, 2025, the Tampa Bay Times reported that Judge Nancy Jacobs took the witness stand in a Tampa courtroom to defend herself against allegations of violating judicial ethics during her contentious 2022 campaign for the judicial seat. Jacobs, who successfully defeated former Hillsborough Judge Jared Smith in the August election, faced scrutiny over statements made by her and her supporters throughout the campaign.

During her testimony, Jacobs acknowledged that some aspects of her campaign could have been handled differently, particularly regarding comments made by her supporters that were disparaging toward Smith. However, she remained firm in her assertion that Smith held prejudiced views against Jewish individuals, referring to a video in which Smith’s wife made remarks about Jacobs, who is Jewish. Jacobs claimed that the comments were indicative of bigotry, stating, “He’s nodding… It indicates to me that he is, in fact, a bigot and an antisemite.”

The hearing marks the beginning of a disciplinary case concerning Jacobs, a remnant of a particularly aggressive local judicial race that deviated from the typically low-key nature of judicial campaigns. While these races are nonpartisan, both candidates exchanged harsh accusations that included implications of partisanship.

The allegations against Jacobs stem from a variety of statements made during and after her campaign, including comments on her campaign’s public Facebook page. Jacobs expressed regret over certain statements, while insisting that most fell within permissible bounds of judicial conduct. “I don’t believe I committed misconduct,” she stated. “I believe I was within the bounds of the (judicial) canons.”

Abortion was a significant issue during the race, particularly following a controversial ruling by Smith that denied a 17-year-old girl the right to obtain an abortion without parental consent. This decision drew criticism from two judges on a three-member appeals court panel, who found that Smith overstepped his judicial discretion. Ultimately, Jacobs won the election with 52% of the vote compared to Smith’s 48%.

Despite her electoral victory, Smith was subsequently appointed by Governor Ron DeSantis to the newly established 6th District Court of Appeal. Meanwhile, Jacobs faces charges from Florida’s Judicial Qualifications Commission and continues to fight to maintain her position on the bench.

During the opening statements, Henry Coxe III, special counsel for the commission, emphasized that the focus of the hearing would be on Jacobs’ conduct during the election, rather than on issues of bigotry or hatred. Jacobs’ attorney, Ryan Barack, argued for the importance of context in evaluating the statements made during the campaign.

Throughout her testimony, Jacobs maintained a soft demeanor, often flipping through a binder containing various social media posts from her campaign. She acknowledged the emotional toll the case had taken on her, admitting to some mistakes and expressing that it has been “heart-rending” with many sleepless nights.

The commission’s case against Jacobs includes allegations related to comments made by her supporters, some of which suggested that Smith was aligned with extreme partisan views. Jacobs noted that upon discovering such comments, she would remove them, although this process sometimes took weeks due to her busy schedule as a practicing attorney and caretaker for her sick father.

One controversial post cited by the commission was a meme urging voters to consider empathy in their electoral choices. Jacobs clarified that while she shared the meme, those words did not originate from her, asserting that it reflected her commitment to impartiality as a judge.

Additionally, Jacobs faced questions regarding an endorsement she received from Planned Parenthood, a partisan organization that supports abortion rights. She contended that she believed her acceptance of the endorsement was justified as nonpartisan.

The commission also scrutinized Jacobs’ actions after assuming her judgeship, particularly her interactions with colleagues. Alicia Whiting-Bozich, who ran for a different judicial seat concurrently with Jacobs, testified that Jacobs encouraged her to challenge fellow judge Robin Fuson, creating tension between them. Jacobs, however, claimed that her comments were misinterpreted.

The panel overseeing the proceedings consists of several legal professionals, including two out-of-town judges. Following the conclusion of the hearing, the panel is expected to provide findings and recommendations to the Florida Supreme Court regarding potential disciplinary actions against Jacobs, which could range from censure to removal from her judicial position.

 

 

Source: Tampa Bay Times